https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87928
--- Comment #1 from Martin Liška ---
One more similar back-trace:
$ gcc
/home/marxin/Programming/gcc/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/x86_64/abi/callabi/func-1.c
-Ofast -mcall-ms2sysv-xlogues -mandroid -mavx512vpopcntdq
during RTL pass: reload
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87928
Bug ID: 87928
Summary: ICE in ix86_compute_frame_layout, at
config/i386/i386.c:11161 since r228607
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438
--- Comment #5 from Alexandre Oliva ---
The candidate patch regresses the regression test added along with the fix for
bug 49095. At first I thought it should, but there seems to be logic in place
to adjust the compare for the flags-clobbering
On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 5:12 PM Paul Hua wrote:
>
> Hi, Matthew:
>
> I committed the patch. Thanks for your review.
>
After committed this patch some test failure under
with-arch=mips64r2(i only test under -with-arch=loongson3a).
664 FAIL: gcc.target/mips/insn-casesi.c -O0 (test for excess
On November 7, 2018 7:47:43 PM GMT+01:00, Rainer Orth
wrote:
>Hi Richard,
>
>> This adds a workaround for LTO decl merging prevailing a
>> non-ultimate origin decl, breaking invariants of the middle-end.
>> In the future (GCC 10) I hope to have DIE references here so
>> this will not be an issue
Hi Joseph:
I don't have commit right, could you help me to commit that, thanks :)
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 1:14 AM Joseph Myers wrote:
>
> This patch is OK.
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> jos...@codesourcery.com
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81902
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80998
Bug 80998 depends on bug 81902, which changed state.
Bug 81902 Summary: new -fsanitize=pointer-overflow option undocumented
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81902
What|Removed |Added
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42726
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva ---
Created attachment 44970
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44970=edit
candidate patch
I've checked in this patch to fix a minor but long-standing bug in the
description of -fno-common, PR 42726.
-Sandra
2018-11-07 Sandra Loosemore
PR middle-end/42726
gcc/
* doc/invoke.texi (Code Gen Options): Clarify -fno-common behavior.
Index: gcc/doc/invoke.texi
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42726
--- Comment #1 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Thu Nov 8 03:37:32 2018
New Revision: 265906
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265906=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-07 Sandra Loosemore
PR middle-end/42726
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86438
Alexandre Oliva changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80828
sandra at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
I noticed this buglet when working on the PR80828 fix:
The introductory paragraph to the Option Index appendix says: "GCC’s
command line options are indexed here without any initial ‘-’ or ‘--’."
Indeed, that was mostly true, but there were ~20 index entries that
incorrectly included the
On 11/7/18 11:36 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> OK with this change.
Before I commit, how about I add the following test cases to test
both valid and invalid asm constraints? I think I have the reg
numbers for the other architectures defined correctly.
Peter
gcc/testsuite/
PR
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 10:34:30PM +, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Hi Jeff,
>
> > So if we're going from 0->2 ULPs in some cases, do we want to guard it
> > with one of the various options, if so, which? Giuliano's follow-up
> > will still have the potential for 2ULPs.
>
> The ULP difference is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87927
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
Patches should be sent to gcc-patches@ after reading
https://gcc.gnu.org/contribute.html .
Trying to knock off some easy documentation bugs from bugzilla...
I've checked in this patch to fix PR driver/80828, about missing
documentation for these options that are passed through to the linker.
-Sandra
2018-11-07 Sandra Loosemore
PR driver/80828
gcc/
* doc/invoke.texi (Option
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80828
--- Comment #2 from sandra at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: sandra
Date: Thu Nov 8 01:26:28 2018
New Revision: 265903
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265903=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-07 Sandra Loosemore
PR driver/80828
gcc/
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 04:09:06PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> This call arg is unused on rs6000.
This is fine. Okay for trunk. Thank you!
Segher
> * config/rs6000/darwin.md (call_indirect_nonlocal_darwin64,
> call_nonlocal_darwin64, call_value_indirect_nonlocal_darwin64,
>
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 04:08:26PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> There is really no need to define a TLSmode mode iterator that is
> identical (since !TARGET_64BIT == TARGET_32BIT) to the much used P
> mode iterator.
Nice :-)
> It's nonsense to think we might ever want to support
> 32-bit TLS on
I have been looking at -fdump-ipa-profile dump with an intention to sanitize
bits of information so that one may use it to judge the "quality of a profile"
in FDO.
The overall question I want to address is - are there ways to know which
functions were not run in the training run, i.e. have ZERO
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87927
Jozef Lawrynowicz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #44968|0 |1
is obsolete|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87690
Jim Wilson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 04:07:15PM +1030, Alan Modra wrote:
> +extern const char *rs6000_output_call (rtx *, unsigned int, bool, const char
> *);
Maybe have a separate rs6000_output_call and rs6000_output_sibcall? Bare
boolean function parameters aren't great. (They can of course both call
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87927
--- Comment #1 from Jozef Lawrynowicz ---
Created attachment 44968
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=44968=edit
proposed patch
In default_print_patchable_function_entry, integer_asm_op is passed
POINTER_SIZE_UNITS. For
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87927
Bug ID: 87927
Summary: ICE: segmentation fault with patchable_function_entry
attribute for msp430-elf -mlarge
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=79393
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|SUSPENDED |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #11 from Nathan
Hi!
On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 06:16:16PM +, Renlin Li wrote:
> Sorry, this is not correct. Instructions scheduled between x and x+1
> directly use hard register r1.
> It is not IRA/LRA assigning r1 to the operands.
>
>
> To reproduce this particular case, you could use:
> cc1 -O3 -marm
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87926
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Wed Nov 7 22:50:20 2018
New Revision: 265899
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265899=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR/87936] --disable-checking bootstrap break
On 11/7/18 2:36 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 11/5/18 7:00 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 11/01/2018 07:45 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> On 11/1/18 1:15 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 01:09:16PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
> -range 0.0 to 1.0, inclusive.
> +range 0.0 to
On 11/7/18 12:42 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Before revision 254025, we'd reject UNSPECs in debug loc exprs.
> TARGET_CONST_NOT_OK_FOR_DEBUG_P still rejects that by default, on all
> ports that override it, except for x86, that accepts @gotoff unspecs.
> We can indeed accept them in top-level
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 03:23:55PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
> > @@ -882,8 +883,12 @@ hash_table
> >if (insert == INSERT && m_size * 3 <= m_n_elements * 4)
> > expand ();
> >
> > - m_searches++;
> > +#if ENABLE_EXTRA_CHECKING
> > +if (insert == INSERT)
> > + verify (comparable,
I'm committing this to unbreak a --disable-checking bootstrap build
failure. As documented in the PR we think there's an out of bound array
access.
nathan
--
Nathan Sidwell
2018-11-07 Nathan Sidwell
PR 87926
* Makefile.in (bitmap.o-warn): Add -Wno-error to unbreak
--disable-checking
On 11/6/18 5:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> Ping: https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-10/msg02081.html
I thought I'd already ACK's this one...
OK.
Jeff
On 11/6/18 9:37 AM, Hafiz Abid Qadeer wrote:
> Hi All,
> I was investigating a character set related problem with windows hosted
> GDB and I tracked it down to a typo in iconv.m4. This typo caused
> libiconv detection to fail and related support was not built into gdb.
>
> The problem is with the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87926
Bug ID: 87926
Summary: bad array-index warning breaks --disable-checking
bootstrap
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Hi Jeff,
> So if we're going from 0->2 ULPs in some cases, do we want to guard it
> with one of the various options, if so, which? Giuliano's follow-up
> will still have the potential for 2ULPs.
The ULP difference is not important since the individual math functions
already have ULP of 3 or
On 10/31/18 12:34 AM, bin.cheng wrote:
> Hi,
> This patch fixes AutoFDO breakage on trunk. The main reason for breakage is
> AutoFDO
> relies on standalone edge count computing and propagating profile
> count/probability info
> on CFG, but in new infra, edge count is actually computed from
The test uses "unsigned long" as the "num" argument to memcpy, but it should be
size_t, and these types are not equivalent on all targets.
Committed to trunk.
>From 3ebbb8102bd9b984c6f1a1eaf0bca45fe4fd23e1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jozef Lawrynowicz
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 12:49:00 +
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 05:05:13PM -0500, Fritz Reese wrote:
--- a/gcc/fortran/options.c
+++ b/gcc/fortran/options.c
@@ -32,6 +32,20 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see
gfc_option_t gfc_option;
+#define _expand(m) m
I think it would be better to avoid names like _expand,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925
Eyal Rozenberg changed:
What|Removed |Added
Version|unknown |9.0
--- Comment #1 from Eyal Rozenberg
On 10/30/18 6:28 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 10/30/18 11:03 AM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:14:21PM +0100, Martin Liška wrote:
>>> +hashtab_chk_error ()
>>> +{
>>> + fprintf (stderr, "hash table checking failed: "
>>> + "equal operator returns true for a pair "
>>> +
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87925
Bug ID: 87925
Summary: Missed optimization: Single-value if-then-else chains
treated differently than switch'es
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
On 10/23/18 3:17 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:09 PM Jeff Law wrote:
>>
>> On 10/20/18 9:47 AM, Giuliano Augusto Faulin Belinassi wrote:
>>> So I did some further investigation comparing the ULP error.
>>>
>>> With the formula that Wilco Dijkstra provided, there are cases
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 09:49:02PM +0100, Paulo Matos wrote:
> On 07/11/2018 20:27, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Sure, it shows the register information at the edges of basic blocks
> > only. This is what you asked for btw ;-)
>
> True, but I need a way to map that information to the assembly
>
On 10/24/18 8:02 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> No camel case. Make the enum type lower case and its values upper case.
>
> Done.
>
> As an aside, I almost thought that after nearly fours years
> I've adjusted to most reviewers' preferences but I'm clearly
> not quite there yet. As usual, this is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87691
--- Comment #10 from jozefl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: jozefl
Date: Wed Nov 7 22:06:26 2018
New Revision: 265894
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265894=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-11-07 Jozef Lawrynowicz
PR c/87691
On 11/7/18, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 03:07:04PM +, Mark Eggleston wrote:
>
>> PR fortran/87919
>> * options.c (gfc_handle_option): Removed case OPT_fdec_structure
>> as it breaks the handling of -fno-dec-structure.
>
> No entries for the tests, i.e.
>
On 10/23/18 7:50 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> On 10/23/2018 03:53 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Oct 2018, Martin Sebor wrote:
>>
>>> between aliases and ifunc resolvers. With -Wattribute-alias=1
>>> that reduced the number of unique instances of the warnings for
>>> a Glibc build to just 27.
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 08:49:26PM +0100, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> msp430-elf uses the partial int type __int20 for pointers in the large memory
> model. __int20 has PSImode, with bitsize of 20.
>
> A few DejaGNU tests fail when built with -mlarge for msp430-elf, when
> transparent unions are
From: Christoph Muellner
The aarch64 ISA specification allows a left shift amount to be applied
after extension in the range of 0 to 4 (encoded in the imm3 field).
This is true for at least the following instructions:
* ADD (extend register)
* ADDS (extended register)
* SUB (extended
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87919
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek ---
The -fdec-structure part has been posted in
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2018-11/msg00029.html
On 10/23/18 1:49 PM, Jozef Lawrynowicz wrote:
> msp430-elf uses the partial int type __int20 for pointers in the large memory
>
> model. __int20 has PSImode, with bitsize of 20.
>
> A few DejaGNU tests fail when built with -mlarge for msp430-elf, when
> transparent unions are used containing
Hi
I wanted to check if you'd be interested in acquiring Supply Chain Managers
Contacts for your sales and marketing campaigns?
Each Contact Contains: LinkedIn Profile, Company Name, Contact name, Title,
Address, Phone, Fax, City, State, Zip codes, Country, Industry, Employee
size, Revenue
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=85982
Fritz Reese changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2018-05-31
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87919
Fritz Reese changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
On 10/20/18 6:01 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>
> The warning only triggers when the bound is less than or equal
> to the length of the constant source string (i.e, when strncpy
> truncates). So IIUC, your suggestion would defer folding only
> such strncpy calls and let gimple_fold_builtin_strncpy
On 10/15/18 9:21 AM, Nikolai Merinov wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On 10/15/18 6:20 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> On 10/15/2018 01:55 AM, Nikolai Merinov wrote:
>>> Hi Martin,
>>>
>>> On 10/12/18 9:58 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
On 10/12/2018 04:14 AM, Nikolai Merinov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87854
--- Comment #1 from Georg-Johann Lay ---
(In reply to Jozef Lawrynowicz from comment #0)
> Rather than ICE'ing should there be some error message about object size
> being too large?
Yes. In any case, there should be no ICE whatever code you
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78707
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56183
Bug 56183 depends on bug 78707, which changed state.
Bug 78707 Summary: [6 Regression] internal compiler error: in push_reload, at
reload.c:1349
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78707
What|Removed
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78707
Georg-Johann Lay changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||7.1.1, 8.0.1
--- Comment #3 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87922
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Priority|P3 |P4
On 07/11/2018 20:27, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>
> Sure, it shows the register information at the edges of basic blocks
> only. This is what you asked for btw ;-)
>
>
True, but I need a way to map that information to the assembly
instructions in the basic block. :) I think it's not
Hi!
I've merged trunk into gomp-5_0-branch. atomic-5.C testcase needed some
adjustments for recent C++ FE changes and the taskloop-reduction-1.c
testcase wasn't correct for 32-bit targets.
Tested on x86_64-linux and on i686-linux (the latter libgomp only),
committed to gomp-5_0-branch.
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> I copied unix.exp to unix-sysroot.exp and added this to it:
>
> if {[info exists env(DEJAGNU_UNIX_SYSROOT_FLAGS)]} {
> set_board_info ldflags "$env(DEJAGNU_UNIX_SYSROOT_FLAGS)"
> }
>
> I figured I would deal with LOCPATH and GCONV_PATH later. When
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69348
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 14:09:24 +0100
Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:34 PM Jan Hubicka wrote:
> > Bootstrapped/regtested x86_64-linux, will commit it after
> > lto-bootstrapping uneless there are complains.
> > +/* Save some WPA->ltrans streaming by freeing enum values. */
>
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 08:52:15AM +0100, Paulo Matos wrote:
> On 07/11/2018 00:40, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > -fdump-rtl-alignments[-all] is the last dump with all that information I
> > think. This one also has all this info without -all it seems. With -all
> > it shows it interleaving the
On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 08:13:29PM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote:
> Isn't that sufficient for the ABI compatibility that we promise, which is
> (unless I'm confused now?) that old (existing) executables continue to
> run correctly when dynamically linking against a new libgomp. Or do we
> also
Hi Chung-Lin!
On Thu, 30 Aug 2018 21:27:22 +0800, Chung-Lin Tang
wrote:
> Hi, this patch properly handles OpenACC 'wait' clauses without arguments,
> making it an equivalent of "wait all".
Thanks!
> (current trunk basically discards and ignores such argument-less wait
> clauses)
Bugs should
On 07/11/18 19:55 +0100, Rainer Orth wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
Implement std::pmr::unsynchronized_pool_resource
* config/abi/pre/gnu.ver: Add new symbols.
* include/std/memory_resource (std::pmr::__pool_resource): New class.
(std::pmr::unsynchronized_pool_resource):
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87924
Bug ID: 87924
Summary: OpenACC wait clauses without async-arguments
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: openacc, patch
Severity: normal
Hi Jonathan,
> Implement std::pmr::unsynchronized_pool_resource
> * config/abi/pre/gnu.ver: Add new symbols.
> * include/std/memory_resource (std::pmr::__pool_resource): New class.
> (std::pmr::unsynchronized_pool_resource): New class.
> * src/c++17/Makefile.am: Add
Hi Richard,
> This adds a workaround for LTO decl merging prevailing a
> non-ultimate origin decl, breaking invariants of the middle-end.
> In the future (GCC 10) I hope to have DIE references here so
> this will not be an issue there anymore.
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on
On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 04:09:23PM -0600, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 02:37:34PM -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > This patch removes all of the so-called power9 fusion support for the GCC
> > compiler. It leaves -mpower9-fusion as a deprecated switch in
On Wed, 2018-11-07 at 17:39 +, Joseph Myers wrote:
> External Email
>
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2018, Steve Ellcey wrote:
>
> >
> > I have a question about the C++ library testsuite. I built and
> > installed
> > a complete toolchain with GCC, binutils, and glibc in a directory
> > ($T) and
> > then
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87921
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||rejects-valid
Target Milestone|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87921
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87442
--- Comment #9 from calixte ---
(In reply to Martin Liška from comment #8)
> Ok, I've got a patch prototype and I hope I'll be able to sent it before
> the end of this stage1.
>
> > The idea is to add two options to easily include/exclude some
Hi All,
This is a backport from trunk for GCC 8 and 7.
SVN revision: r264595.
Regression tested on arm-none-eabi.
gcc/ChangeLog
2018-11-02 Mihail Ionescu
Backport from mainiline
2018-09-26 Eric Botcazou
* config/arm/arm.c (arm_reorg): Skip Thumb reorg pass
On 10/09/2018 09:52 AM, Ramana Radhakrishnan wrote:
On 09/10/2018 09:27, Mihail Ionescu wrote:
Hi all,
This patch removes some of the machine mode checks from the arm backend when
emitting instructions by using the '@' construct (Parameterized Names[2]). It
is based on the previous AArch64
On 11/7/18 11:36 AM, Jeff Law wrote:
> I was referring to a more fundamental check in the IL checkers.
Yes, I understood that. I was just replying to Segher's specific issue
with this code. I do plan on looking at adding IL verifier checks for
subregs of subregs like you requested.
> Segher
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87923
Bug ID: 87923
Summary: ICE in gfc_widechar_to_char, at fortran/scanner.c:198
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018, Steve Ellcey wrote:
> I have a question about the C++ library testsuite. I built and installed
> a complete toolchain with GCC, binutils, and glibc in a directory ($T) and
> then I run the GCC testsuite with this command:
>
> # cd to GCC object directory
> make -j50 check
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87922
Bug ID: 87922
Summary: ICE in gfc_wide_strlen, at fortran/scanner.c:142
Product: gcc
Version: 9.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component:
On 11/7/18 9:29 AM, Peter Bergner wrote:
> On 11/6/18 6:14 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
>> Or more general, that what is inside the subreg is a reg, because the
>> code does rely on that.
>
> I think you mean to beef up the following from:
>
> + if (HARD_REGISTER_P
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=69654
G. Steinmetz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||gs...@t-online.de
--- Comment #6 from G.
I have a question about the C++ library testsuite. I built and installed
a complete toolchain with GCC, binutils, and glibc in a directory ($T) and
then I run the GCC testsuite with this command:
# cd to GCC object directory
make -j50 check RUNTESTFLAGS="--tool_opts '--sysroot=$T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87921
Bug ID: 87921
Summary: Incorrect error "storage size of [array] isn't known
(when it is)
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
This patch is OK.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
On Tue, Nov 6, 2018, at 9:28 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018, 10:32 PM Daniel Engel > Hi,
>>
>> Over the past couple of years, I have hand-assembled a new floating point
>> library for the ARM Cortex M0 architecture. I know the M0 is not generally
>> regarded as a
Hello global GCC reviewers,
Would it be possible to apply the reviewed patch below?
Thank you,
Fredrik
On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 08:33:33PM +0200, Fredrik Noring wrote:
> The Linux kernel requires and emulates LL and SC for the R5900 too. The
> special --without-llsc default for the R5900 is
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87904
Nathan Sidwell changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87904
--- Comment #1 from Nathan Sidwell ---
Author: nathan
Date: Wed Nov 7 16:28:46 2018
New Revision: 265879
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=265879=gcc=rev
Log:
[PR C++/87904] lookup ICE
On 11/6/18 6:14 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Or more general, that what is inside the subreg is a reg, because the
> code does rely on that.
I think you mean to beef up the following from:
+ if (HARD_REGISTER_P (nop_reg)
+ &&
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86395
David Malcolm changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
The short loop bug under certain conditions causes loops to
execute only once or twice, due to a hardware bug in the R5900 chip.
`-march=r5900' already enables the R5900 short loop workaround.
However, the R5900 ISA and most other MIPS ISAs are mutually
exclusive since R5900-specific instructions
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
